American Frontline Healthcare Personnel's Access to and Use of Personal Protective Equipment Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
To quantify adequacy of personal protective equipment (PPE) for U.S. healthcare personnel (HCP) at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with infection risk.Methods
March-May 2020 survey of the national Nurses' Health Studies and the Growing Up Today study regarding self-reported PPE access, use and reuse. COVID-19 endpoints included SARS-CoV-2 tests and COVID-19 status predicted from symptoms.Results
Nearly 22% of 22,232 frontline HCP interacting with COVID-19 patients reported sometimes or always lacking PPE. Fifty percent of HCP reported not needing respirators, including 13% of those working in COVID-19 units. Lack of PPE was cross-sectionally associated with two-fold or greater odds of COVID-19 among those who interacted with infected patients.Conclusion
These data show the need to improve the U.S. infection prevention culture of safety when confronting a novel pathogen.
SUBMITTER: Rich-Edwards JW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8562916 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTo report frontline healthcare workers' (HCWs) experiences with personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. To understand HCWs' fears and concerns surrounding PPE, their experiences following its guidance and how these affected their perceived ability to deliver care during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignA rapid qualitative appraisal study combining three sources of data: semistructured in-depth telephone interviews with frontline HCWs (n=46), media reports (n=39 newspaper articles and 145 000 social media posts) and government PPE policies (n=25).ParticipantsInterview participants were HCWs purposively sampled from critical care, emergency and respiratory departments as well as redeployed HCWs from primary, secondary and tertiary care centres across the UK.ResultsA major concern was running out of PPE, putting HCWs and patients at risk of infection. Following national level guidance was often not feasible when there were shortages, leading to reuse and improvisation of PPE. Frequently changing guidelines generated confusion and distrust. PPE was reserved for high-risk secondary care settings and this translated into HCWs outside these settings feeling inadequately protected. Participants were concerned about differential access to adequate PPE, particularly for women and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic HCWs. Participants continued delivering care despite the physical discomfort, practical problems and communication barriers associated with PPE use.ConclusionThis study found that frontline HCWs persisted in caring for their patients despite multiple challenges including inappropriate provision of PPE, inadequate training and inconsistent guidance. In order to effectively care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, frontline HCWs need appropriate provision of PPE, training in its use as well as comprehensive and consistent guidance. These needs must be addressed in order to protect the health and well-being of the most valuable healthcare resource in the COVID-19 pandemic: our HCWs.
| S-EPMC7818840 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrontline workers (FLWs) are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection during care interactions than the general population. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is regarded as an effective intervention for limiting the transmission of airborne viruses. However, research examining FLWs' intention to use PPE is limited.ObjectivesThis study addresses this research gap and also contributes by expanding the conceptual mechanism of planned behavior theory by incorporating three novel dimensions (perceived benefits of PPE, risk perceptions of the epidemic, and unavailability of PPE) in order to gain a better understanding of the factors that influence FLWs' intentions to use PPE.MethodAnalysis is based on a sample of 763 FLWs in Pakistan using a questionnaire survey, and the structural equation modeling approach is employed to evaluate the suppositions.ResultsStudy results indicate that attitude, perceived benefits of PPE, and risk perceptions of the epidemic have positive influence on FLWs' intention to use PPE. In comparison, the unavailability of PPE and the cost of PPE have opposite effects. Meanwhile, environmental concern has a neutral effect.ConclusionsThe study results specify the importance of publicizing COVID-19's lethal impacts on the environment and society, ensuring cheap PPE, and simultaneously enhancing workplace safety standards.
| S-EPMC8855926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE), pathogens can be transferred from the PPE to the bodies of healthcare workers (HCWs), putting HCWs and patients at risk of exposure and infection. PPE doffing practices of HCWs who cared for patients with viral respiratory infections were observed at an acute care hospital from March 2017 to April 2018. A trained observer recorded doffing performance of HCWs inside the patient rooms using a pre-defined checklist based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline. Doffing practices were observed 162 times during care of 52 patients infected with respiratory viral pathogens. Out of the 52 patients, 30 were in droplet and contact isolation, 21 were in droplet isolation, and 1 was in contact isolation. Overall, 90% of observed doffing was incorrect, with respect to the doffing sequence, doffing technique, or use of appropriate PPE. Common errors were doffing gown from the front, removing face shield of the mask, and touching potentially contaminated surfaces and PPE during doffing. Deviations from the recommended PPE doffing protocol are common and can increase potential for contamination of the HCW's clothing or skin after providing care. There is a clear need to change the approach used to training HCWs in PPE doffing practices.
| S-EPMC7157959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:GetUsPPE.org has built a centralized platform to facilitate matches for PPE donations, with an active role in matching donors with the appropriate recipients. A manual match process was limited by volunteer hours, thus we developed an open-access matching algorithm using a linear programming-based transportation model. From April 14, 2020 to April 27, 2020, the algorithm was used to match 83,136 items of PPE to 135 healthcare facilities in need across the United States with a median of 214.3 miles traveled, 100% of available donations matched, met the full quantity of requested PPE for 67% of recipients matched, and with 46% matches under 30 miles traveled. Compared with the period April 1, 2020 to April 13, 2020, when PPE matching was manual, the algorithm resulted in a 280% increase in matches/day. This publicly available automated algorithm could be deployed in future situations when the healthcare supply chain is insufficient.
| S-EPMC7846564 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE) can significantly reduce the risk of infection associated with caring for patients. This study aimed to investigate the knowledge, awareness, and behaviors related to the PPE usage among frontline nurses in a nationally designated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic.Materials and methodsThe study was performed in two phases: (1) a questionnaire survey to assess the knowledge, awareness, and behaviors related to PPE use, and (2) in-depth personal interviews to elaborate the survey findings. The questionnaires were distributed to all 121 registered nurses in three isolation wards and an intensive care unit which dedicated for patients with COVID-19 and 102 nurses completed survey (84.3% response rate). In-depth interviews were conducted with a total of 7 nurses.ResultsAmong the survey participant, 100% stated that they knew how to protect themselves while providing nursing care and 93.1% stated that they knew the recommended PPE by task. Most survey participant mainly wore gloves, face shield, N95 or equivalent respirator, and a long-sleeved gown, but one-third of the participants sometimes used coveralls instead of long-sleeved gown. In-depth interviews, the importance of timely updated and specific guidelines for selecting the appropriate type of PPE was highlighted. The adequate supply of PPE, convenience at work, and the role of responsible leadership mainly determined behaviors related to the PPE.ConclusionAs new information on COVID-19 continues to emerge, the up-to-date and specific PPE guideline with evidence should be prepared. The spread of accurate information, the role of accountable leadership, and the active communication under positive organizational culture are important for the proper use of PPE.
| S-EPMC8731245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this paper, we examine the cost effectiveness of investment in personal protective equipment (PPE) for protecting health care workers (HCWs) against two infectious diseases: Ebola virus and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This builds on similar work published for COVID-19 in 2020. We developed two separate decision-analytic models using a payer perspective to compare the costs and effects of multiple PPE use scenarios for protection of HCW against Ebola and MRSA. Bayesian multivariate sensitivity analyses were used to consider the uncertainty surrounding all key parameters for both diseases. We estimate the cost to provide adequate PPE for a HCW encounter with an Ebola patient is $13.04, which is associated with a 97% risk reduction in infections. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $3.98 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Because of lowered infection and disability rates, this investment is estimated to save $132.27 in averted health systems costs, a financial ROI of 1,014%. For MRSA, the cost of adequate PPE for one HCW encounter is $0.88, which is associated with a 53% risk reduction in infections. The mean ICER is $362.14 per DALY averted. This investment is estimated to save $20.18 in averted health systems costs, a financial ROI of 2,294%. In terms of total health savings per death averted, investing in adequate PPE is the dominant strategy for Ebola and MRSA, suggesting that it is both more costly and less clinically optimal to not fully invest in PPE for these diseases. There are many compelling reasons to invest in PPE to protect HCWs. This analysis examines the economic case, building on previous evidence that protecting HCWs with PPE is cost-effective for COVD-19. Ebola and MRSA scenarios were selected to allow assessment of both endemic and epidemic infectious diseases. While PPE is cost-effective for both conditions, compared to our analysis for COVID-19, PPE is relatively more cost-effective for Ebola and relatively less so for MRSA. Further research is needed to assess shortfalls in the PPE supply chain identified during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure an efficient and resilient supply in the face of future pandemics.
| S-EPMC10286963 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the COVID-19 era physicians have to face with need to perform office procedures maintaining the maximum safety for both the patient and the Doctor himself. The purpose of this paper was to suggest some equipment useful to perform outpatient visits in an ENT setting.MethodsA simple modification of the standard headlight used during an ENT visit provides the operator a better face protection without any impairment in vision and comfort. In addition, in order to perform a safer ENT examination, a droplet protective barrier has been adapted to the patient's chair.ResultsBoth the devices have been texted with success during a period of 2 months in our ENT clinic. No cases of contamination have been registered among physicians.ConclusionA simple modification to a device used in the routine ENT activity implemented its protective efficacy with low costs. On the other hand, a more structured tool permitted to obtain a more protected environment during patient examination.
| S-EPMC7333584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE) reduces this risk. We sought to determine the prevalence and predictors of self-reported access to appropriate PPE (aPPE) for HCWs in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe conducted cross sectional analyses using data from a nationwide questionnaire-based cohort study administered between December 2020-February 2021. The outcome was a binary measure of self-reported aPPE (access all of the time vs access most of the time or less frequently) at two timepoints: the first national lockdown in the UK in March 2020 (primary analysis) and at the time of questionnaire response (secondary analysis).ResultsTen thousand five hundred eight HCWs were included in the primary analysis, and 12,252 in the secondary analysis. 35.2% of HCWs reported aPPE at all times in the primary analysis; 83.9% reported aPPE at all times in the secondary analysis. In the primary analysis, after adjustment (for age, sex, ethnicity, migration status, occupation, aerosol generating procedure exposure, work sector and region, working hours, night shift frequency and trust in employing organisation), older HCWs and those working in Intensive Care Units were more likely to report aPPE at all times. Asian HCWs (aOR:0.77, 95%CI 0.67-0.89 [vs White]), those in allied health professional and dental roles (vs those in medical roles), and those who saw a higher number of COVID-19 patients compared to those who saw none (≥ 21 patients/week 0.74, 0.61-0.90) were less likely to report aPPE at all times. Those who trusted their employing organisation to deal with concerns about unsafe clinical practice, compared to those who did not, were twice as likely to report aPPE at all times. Significant predictors were largely unchanged in the secondary analysis.ConclusionsOnly a third of HCWs in the UK reported aPPE at all times during the first lockdown and that aPPE had improved later in the pandemic. We also identified key determinants of aPPE during the first UK lockdown, which have mostly persisted since lockdown was eased. These findings have important implications for the safe delivery of healthcare during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9255515 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPersonal protective equipment (PPE) is essential to protect healthcare workers (HCWs). The practice of reusing PPE poses high levels of risk for accidental contamination by HCWs. Scarce medical literature compares practical means or methods for safe reuse of PPE while actively caring for patients.MethodsIn this study, observations were made of 28 experienced clinical participants performing five donning and doffing encounters while performing simulated full evaluations of patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Participants' N95 respirators were coated with a fluorescent dye to evaluate any accidental fomite transfer that occurred during PPE donning and doffing. Participants were evaluated using blacklight after each doffing encounter to evaluate new contamination sites, and were assessed for the cumulative surface area that occurred due to PPE doffing. Additionally, participants' workstations were evaluated for contamination.ResultsAll participants experienced some contamination on their upper extremities, neck and face. The highest cumulative area of fomite transfer risk was associated with the hook and paper bag storage methods, and the least contamination occurred with the tabletop storage method. Storing a reused N95 respirator on a tabletop was found to be a safer alternative than the current recommendation of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to use a paper bag for storage. All participants donning and doffing PPE were contaminated.ConclusionPPE reusage practices pose an unacceptably high level of risk of accidental cross-infection contamination to healthcare workers. The current design of PPE requires complete redesign with improved engineering and usability to protect healthcare workers.
| S-EPMC9172254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 virus is highly infectious resulting in increased infection and death among the front-line Healthcare Workers (HCW) because of limited access to personal protective equipment (PPE). This study assesses the availability and self-reported use of PPE amongst HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. A mixed-method study was conducted through a cross-sectional survey and in-depth interviews amongst HCW. Quantitative data analysis was done using SPSS version 26 and thematic analysis was done for the in-depth interview. A total of 258 HCW completed the survey while 15 HCW took part in the in-depth interview. The mean age was 40 (±8.6) years, 67.4% were female and 83.3% were married. 49% were Doctors, 21.1% were Nurses, 28.7% were other allied HCW and 62.2% had at least 10 years of practice experience. Only 22.1% of HCWs had regular access to PPE and only 20.6% had access to N-95 facemask compare to other PPEs. Male HCWs and those working at secondary or tertiary facilities had access to N-95 facemask (p-value 0.025 and 0.010 respectively). The facilitator of PPE use is leadership quality of hospital head and donation of PPE to the facilities while the barriers to PPE use include a limited supply of PPE, as well as facility's infrastructural and operational challenges. The study reported limited access to essential PPE with varying perspectives on its use. Therefore, access, knowledge, and appropriate use of PPE need urgent attention with improved implementation of infection control policy at the facility level.
| S-EPMC8133390 | biostudies-literature